Top platforms to help with spelling and grammar

Reading content line-by-line is never easy, especially when there’s volumes of it. But it is essential to ensure quality remains paramount. Digital tools can take much of the grunt work out of editing. They can also help charities put their best foot forward.

 

Most have the ability not only to find spelling and grammar errors, but to suggest alternative phrases. By using the English language wisely, creators can be more compelling and authentic.

 

Here, we survey the best editing platforms for content.

 

 

Grammarly

 

Heavily marketed as a general text editor, Grammarly works across most apps and computer platforms. The technology uses advance machine learning and natural language processing to come up with better suggestions when compared to other editors. It goes far beyond what Microsoft Word can do and is largely intuitive to use.

 

Pros: This is for those who want to improve how they write. Grammarly’s paid subscription services includes guidance and rationale on the style and voice of the writing.

 

Cons: You may find reading all the flags and suggestions distracting.

 

 

Typely

 

Typely is the for the narrowly focused editor. There’s no software to be installed like Grammarly and it does not work across platforms. In fact, the editor is a simple webpage that writers insert text into. An editor box is on the right-hand side, flagging any potential problems in the body.

 

Pros: The service is free.

 

Cons: The writing needs to be done either on the webpage or pasted in. This might not work for ad hoc communications.

 

 

Hemmingway App

 

Hemmingway App is like Typely. It’s a single webpage where editors and authors can do a simple check. The editor makes no distinction in terms of voice, tone, or context. The platform checks for grammar and spelling and gives the overall content a score. Plain language is the aim here. More complex sentence structures will score higher and receive flags to review.

 

Pros: Again, the service is free to use.

 

Cons: Similar to Typely, text needs to be imported. Complex sentence structures are red lined even if they are coherent.

 

 

WordTune

 

WordTune is an app extension that works across any online platform, including Gmail, Slack, Web Outlook, WhatsApp, and others. Like Grammarly, the technology here is advanced when compared to the simple text editors. The free plan allows writers to rephrase text, choose the right tone of voice, and change the length of the pieces. But the freeware only allows a fixed number of changes per day.

 

Pros: WordTune can translate into other languages.

 

Cons: WordTune has a beta version available for Microsoft Word, which may have some kinks to work out.

 

 

Wordy

 

Rather than providing an automated assistant like Grammarly or Typely, Wordy requires writers to upload or drop text into the platform. The editing is actually done by a human, so writers can rely on preserving existing voice and attitude. The service charges per job, so for charities on a budget, which might work well for longer pieces.

 

Pros: Ad hoc professional services can be bought without the commitment.

 

Cons: The service isn’t automated, so feedback is not live – the writing must be ‘complete’ when you send it off.

 

 

Scribbr

 

A Wordy competitor, the proofreading service requires authors to upload and describe the purpose of the content. A real person edits the piece and provides a tracked-changes version for review. Charities engaged in research or policy development might use this service.

 

Pros: There’s professional feedback provided.

 

Cons: Turnaround times might be an issue.

 

 

Reedsy

 

Where more serious writers turn, Reedsy offers book editing services. Perfect for those writing formatted papers or e-publications. But still in development are the editing services that feature partnerships between editor and writer. Under this addition, editorial teams work with authors, so the feedback is live and debatable.

 

Pros: Lots of features meant for professional publications.

 

Cons: Too fiddly for shorter content.

 

 

Language Tool

 

Another simple writing editor, Language Tool’s main advantage over the other ones is it can be added on directly to Microsoft Word. This benefit avoids the copying and pasting into the web platform. Like the other tools reviewed here, the editor finds grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, and scores the work for quality.

 

Pros: Integrations with platforms means charities of all shapes and sizes can make this work.

 

Cons: Some integrations are still in beta versions.

 

 

Writer

 

This platform helps everyone stick to their guidelines. In terms of style, tone, and voice, the online editor includes pre-determined templates and suggestions so that teams can write as one. There are also content rules, so that the voice and personalisations stay the same.  

 

Pros: Customisation enables greater teamwork and collaboration for larger charities.

 

Cons: No free lunch here – the service comes at a small cost.